Method and system for the management of professional services project information

ABSTRACT

A method and system are provided for the transfer and/or aggregation of data and, in particular integrating data used in managing a professional services practice. The invention preferably transfers and/or aggregates data relating to the identity of clients and matters for whom professional services are being rendered with data relating to the work which data may be maintained in inconsistent, proprietary formats, comprising one or more of the following types of information: accounting; budgeting; docketing; time and billing; work product; word processing; records; project management; and/or other information relating to the professional services. The system of the present invention preferably comprises data storage and data processing means adapted to use the data in substantially portable and/or application-independent format, and/or and transfer or aggregate data between common, and/or proprietary data formats.

PRIOR APPLICATION

This application is a division of and claims priority to U.S. patentapplication Ser. No. 10/315,160, filed Dec. 10, 2002 claims priority toUnited States Provisional Application No. 60/337,158, filed Dec. 10,2001, each of which applications is incorporated by reference, as iffully set forth herein.

FIELD OF THE INVENTION

The present invention relates to a method and system for, and apparatusadapted to, manage information used in a business and, in particular, aprofessional services practice. The present invention preferablyfacilitates the transfer, compilation, aggregation, integration, and/ordistribution of data. The data may be in: one or more softwareapplications; common or proprietary, structured or unstructured,formats; centralized or distributed database(s); and/or compatible orincompatible formats.

Data typically must be transferred, cleaned, converted, and/or codedfrom a native format into the recipient's format, before it can be usedby the recipient. Frequently, incompatibility is so severe that the datamay need to be re-keyed or otherwise reentered. Data may be coded in oneformat, converted to another format so that it can be transferred orexchanged, and converted back into the first or other proprietaryformats for subsequent processing. Third parties may not have access tothe formats used at various stages of processing, requiring furtherconversion.

BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION

Professional service(s) practices rely on information from disparatesources. A medical practice, for example, may maintain: patientidentifying and contact information; medical history records; financialand accounting software to generate bills, process insurance and thirdparty payment claims, and perform accounts receivable, accounts payable,general ledger, and payroll functions; and various other systems. In ahospital or clinical setting, separate software systems typically manageradiology, pharmacy, laboratory, and nursing functions. Privatephysicians typically use separate software systems for scheduling;accounting; word processing; and retrieving laboratory records. Inaddition, various expert systems have been developed to assist indiagnosing conditions and devising appropriate treatment therapies.Other software systems provide assistance in selecting appropriate testsand interpreting results.

As a further example, a law practice typically maintains informationrelating to: clients; matters being worked on for those clients;projects undertaken in connection with those matters; tasks that arenecessary to complete those projects, and events relating to thosematters and/or projects. These may include, without limitation:identifying and/or contact information for clients, potential clients,adversaries, counsel, foreign associate counsel, witnesses, vendors,experts, investigators, and others involved in the matter or project;billing information; documents, references, exhibits, and other records;email and other electronic records; fact and legal research;correspondence; pleadings; docketing; finance, budgeting, timekeeping,expense, billing, general ledger, accounts receivable, accounts payable,collection, and other financial data; and, potentially, a wide varietyof other project management tools.

Document management and/or document assembly systems are typicallyemployed in a legal practice to generate, maintain, manage, and retrievework product. Many legal practices maintain “libraries” of prior workproduct, work flow forms, and/or “precedents.” These resources helpmaintain quality control, providing a knowledge base for trainingyounger attorneys and efficiently generating work product. Graphics,modeling, presentation, and visualization tools are becoming more widelyused. In addition, as in medicine, various expert systems are used,particularly in specialized areas of practice, such as litigation,securities, real estate, intellectual property, and others. Morerecently, the demand for case management systems has increased,particularly among in-house law departments. Case management systemsknown by the present inventor prior to the present invention, however,shared several of the deficiencies identified below.

Professional service(s) practices typically maintain these types ofinformation in various custom, proprietary, specialized, mass-marketed,and/or open software applications. These applications are not adaptedto, and in many instances, are not capable of, cooperating orcommunicating with one another. Data, therefore, must frequently beconverted or re-entered in various applications.

One of the greatest strengths of modern computer networks is theiradaptability. They support a wide variety of different softwareapplications and enable users to share work product. The users may bepermitted to tailor their computing environment to their individual workpatterns. This is highly desirable, yet, this pattern of individualizedcomputing fosters a proliferation of software applications, operatingsystems, and network management applications. The architecture ofcomputer networks has compounded the difficulties of managing thesedisparate systems.

Most networks combine various hardware components: personal computers;network and mainframe components; servers and routers: desk tops,laptops, and handhelds; remote access devices; personal digitalassistants (PDAs); wireless access devices; various output devices, anda bewildering array of accessories. Each typically has a differentoperating system; of different vintage, quality, and capability. Apartfrom the substantial challenges this imposes on network managers andsystems administrators, it has made the ready transferability of databetween components more difficult, if not impossible.

In a typical law practice, for example, information systems and softwaremay include, without limitation:

-   -   Hard copies of documents, files, specimens, and exhibits;    -   Physical exhibits and samples;    -   Electronic records;    -   Audio, video, voice mail, and other records;    -   Network Operating Systems software (typically some variant of        Windows, i.e., 2000, NT, XP, 98, or 95; IBM 0S2; Apple; etc.);    -   Records Management Systems (files, bar coding, indexers, or        specialized records management applications);    -   Document Assembly Systems (such as “IPOAS” in an intellectual        property practice setting, or other document assembly systems);    -   Document Management Systems (such as Hummingbird; PC DOCS;        SoftSolutions; iManage; etc.);    -   “Knowledge Management” Systems (which are typically customized        or proprietary software or some modified version of a Document        Management System);    -   Email systems (ccmail, Notes mail, Microsoft mail, etc.);    -   Docketing systems {for example, CPI. Dennemeyer, IP Master;        Patsy, IPPO, etc., for intellectual property practices; and        other docketing systems for securities, tax, litigation, or        other practice areas);    -   Word processing systems (WordPerfect, Microsoft Word, etc.);    -   Scheduling and calendaring systems (Lotus Notes, Microsoft        Outlook, etc.);    -   Relationship Management and/or Contact Information (InterAction;        Outlook; Notes; Elite Apex; Aptus; customized or proprietary        software; etc.);    -   Litigation Support (Summation; LiveNote/VideoNote; Access;        CaseMap/TimeMap; Concordance; Trial Director; JFS Litigator's        Notebook; Sanction; Folio Views; iConnect; DB Textworks; Isys;        Introspect; BRS Search; Reallegal; E-tech; Ipro; etc.);    -   Electronic evidence service vendors (Ontrack; Electronic        Evidence; Applied Discovery; Fios; Daticon; Deloitte & Touche;        and others);    -   Electronic portals (such as those supplied by vendors such as SV        Technology; Plumtree; Sequoia; and others);    -   Desktop fax software (RightFax; Legal Fax; and others);    -   Time entry systems (DTE; Carpe Diem; CMS Open; Elite; custom or        proprietary systems; etc.);    -   Accounting systems (Elite; CMS Open; Elite for Windows NT; TMC;        Rippe & Kingston; custom or proprietary in-house; etc.);    -   Database applications (lotus Notes, Microsoft Excel, Microsoft        Access, Corel Quatro Pro, FoxPro, Lotus 123, Concordance, etc.);    -   Presentation applications (Microsoft PowerPoint; Corel        Presentations; Sanction; Trial Director; etc.);    -   Project Management support systems (Microsoft Project; Project        Gateway, etc.);    -   Critical path, probability assessment, and risk analysis tools        (such as TreeAge software, etc.);    -   Various specialty applications (such as project management.        flowcharting, PERT and GANT charting, budgeting tools. etc.);    -   Case Management systems (LawPack (Hummingbird); Corprasoft;        Elite Information Group; Miratech; Prolaw (West Group);        Reallegal; and PWC and other systems support vendors); and    -   Potentially, a wide variety of other applications software.        Data accessed by these various applications may be maintained        centrally and/or on a distributed basis. Prior to the present        invention, data was not readily transferable between the various        applications used in a professional service(s) practice.        Typically the data was maintained in a format that was        proprietary and, in some cases, exclusive to the single        application, or at least not readily portable to other        applications.

Docketing illustrates some of the problems posed by the lack of datatransferability in a law practice setting. Both counsel and theirclients desire access to certain information maintained in a docket.Professional liability carriers typically require independence andredundancy in docketing, or calendaring, systems. A law firm typicallymaintains: organization-wide; department-wide; and/or practicegroup-wide docketing systems, in addition to each individual attorney orprofessional maintaining their own docket. The organization ordepartment-wide system is typically secured; a limited number ofindividuals have write access and others have read-only access. Whilethese restrictions help preserve the security, integrity, andreliability of the data, they impair the transferability of the data.

Many docketing systems now include a web-access feature that allows theclient, or others outside the law firm to access the data. Yet, thesesystems generally remain: proprietary; rigid in their formatting; andrigid in their ability to transfer or exchange information with othersoftware applications and to accept related project management and/orfinancial information. More important, a corporate client retainingmultiple outside law firms would be forced to access multiple web sitesin order to collect the desired docketing information from each.Centralizing the docket by a third party to derive the client form, theburden shifts to each law firm which still requires visiting severaldifferent sites to collect the desired docketing information about itsclients. While the client's interests should predominate relative tothose of the outside law firm, secure and ready access by all concernedis preferable.

Extranets remain complex and limited in their functionality. Web-basedsystems have not resolved the fundamental problem that pertinent data isstored in multiple inconsistent formats.

Data maintained in a docketing system (such as addresses, client andmatter identifying information, deadline dates, events, tasks, etc.),may also be needed in accounting, word processing, litigation support,case management, risk analysis, database, and other applications. It maybe needed by persons both inside and outside the organization. Therigidity of most docketing systems, however, impairs or prevents thedata from being readily exchanged with other applications. Consequently,data is typically manually transferred (cut and pasted) or simplykey-entered repeatedly in each application in which it is needed,presenting multiple additional opportunities for errors and datacorruption.

As a further example, address book applications provide a starkillustration of some of the inefficiencies and problems associated withthe lack of application-independence and portability of data used in aprofessional services practice. In a typical law office, an address isneeded by several professionals and support staff: the accounting systemto clear conflicts and to open new client matters against which toaccrue time and charges; the docketing system, the word processing anddocument management systems to enable professionals to ‘generate workproduct, lists of specialized vendors, such as foreign associatecounsel; the relationship management systems to enable professionals toconduct client development and business development activities; and thevarious handheld and portable devices in which the professionals maywish to maintain their personal address data.

The address of a new client, for example, may be entered (typicallymanually) in an attorney's personal address list when he or she solicitsthe prospective client initially. In the course of generating or sendingmaterials soliciting the prospective client, the address may bereentered and then maintained in various distributed applications suchas business development lists, word processing systems, documentmanagement systems, and/or relationship management systems. The sameaddress may even be entered by multiple professionals in the sameapplications. If the client engages the firm, the address, among otherinformation, will be reentered—typically manually—into the firm'sconflicts checking, accounting, and/or time and billing systems. Theaddress will typically be reentered—again manually—into the firm'sdocketing and/or calendaring systems. As files are created, it will bereentered—again typically manually—in the firm's filing systems. So too,as work product is generated, it is typically reentered into theindividual documents as they are created, although one or more of theseiterations of the address may be captured at some point in a documentmanagement and/or forms generation system, from which it can be used inother documents. As bills are generated, the address is accessedagain—either by entering it anew, or from one of the multitude oflocations where it already resides—to generate an invoice and coverletter.

As a result, the same intended address now resides in multiple locationsin the firm's computer network, each likely being different and possiblycontaining incorrect and inconsistent information, style, andformatting. At each point where it was entered or used, time is wastedin reentering the same information. At each entry point, there are newopportunities for additional errors being introduced.

These problems extend to databases that are expressly intended toresolve these problems. For example, some relationship managementsystems are expressly designed to be compatible with certain email,calendaring, and address systems, such as Microsoft Outlook and/or LotusNotes. Yet, while the data may be portable between the applications to agreater or lesser degree, incompatibilities remain, that have resultedin corruption or loss of the data, or general protection faults. Forexample, errors and inconsistencies frequently result between Palmdatabases, Notes databases, and relationship management databases thatpurport to contain the same information. The format of the data isdifferent in all three and, although some fields are substantially thesame, others are different, truncated, or missing. The data is notreliably transferred between them in practice, due to software flawsand/or incompatibilities. Moreover, the undue complexity of thesesystems makes them difficult for even sophisticated users to usecompetently. In Applicant's experience, these problems extend to all ofthe types of data used in a professional service(s) practices.

Some mass-marketed applications have claimed portability, while othershave simply ignored or actively resisted it. Generally, word processingapplications, due to their widespread use, have been under greaterpressure to make their data portable than more specialized applications,such as docketing, accounting, and time and billing applications. Priorto the present invention, none of the applications of which Applicant isaware have achieved the desired level of portability, let alonesubstantial application independence of their data, with the possibleexceptions of applications, such as Adobe Acrobat, that specificallyattempt to enhance the portability of data.

Applications, such as Microsoft Word, WordPerfect, PowerPoint, CorelWordPerfect, and/or Corel QuartoPro have claimed at various times thatsome data was substantially portable between several of theseapplications. Even these limited applications, however, encounteredsubstantial problems in transferring data from one application toanother prior to the present invention. Docketing and accounting systemshave generally been even more problematic with respect to theportability and/or application-independence of their data.

In some businesses outside the professional service(s) sector, theseincompatibility problems have been addressed by massive integration ofcentralized database applications. This is typically done,enterprise-wide, on an Oracle, SAS, SAP, or other centralized platform,integrating financial and operational data. In a professional servicessetting, such as law and/or medicine, centralized database applicationshave generally been disfavored for several reasons. First, the cost andcomplexity of these types of integration projects have been prohibitive.Second, the rapid evolution of hardware and software furthercontraindicate the massive investment required for centrally integrateddatabases. Third, the distributed nature of professional services, aswell as security concerns, teach away from massive integration in aprofessional services setting.

Distributed systems provide lower overall cost and greater flexibility,as well as enhanced availability and security, in the event of a failureof, or attack on, one or more network components. In addition, the needfor access to the data by multiple independent parties (clients, theiroutside counsel, vendors, and others), continues to favor distributedsolutions.

Thus, there has long been an unresolved need for secure, reliable,simple data transfer between applications. Prior known approaches havefailed to meet this long-felt and unresolved need, particularly in aprofessional service(s) setting. The commercial software industry haslong overlooked professional service(s) markets. Professional service(s)markets, therefore, have had to rely on either mass-marketed softwareapplications that are not adapted to their particular needs, and/orcustomized and/or proprietary solutions that are expensive, complex, andlimited in their flexibility and adaptability.

Mass Marketed Software Applications

No mass-marketed software application is “best in class” in everyfunction it performs (e.g., email, scheduling, calendaring, wordprocessing, document management, spreadsheet, docketing, etc.).Applications, or suites of applications, may be considered by some userssuperior in certain functions and inferior in others. Lawyers in privatepractice, in particular, need to interface with multiple clients who maybe using different software applications for performing the samefunction. Users end up securing multiple, competing softwareapplications. This results in duplication in purchasing and training,while only certain programs or features of each application are actuallyused.

In principle, data should be application-independent. Any applicationshould be able to access the data. In practice, however, databases arebuilt for specific applications. Commentators have long recognized that,“[t]he biggest challenge is to find ways of cutting the ties thatinherently bind programs to specific computers and to other programs.”W. Wayt, Gibbs, “Trends in Computing, Software's Chronic Crisis,”SCIENTIFIC AMERICAN, September 1994, at 94. A need exists for consumersto meld the best components of various programs and/or suites to meetthe user's, rather than the programmer's, software vendor's, orreseller's needs. A consumer focus on data transferability, however, islargely absent from software development. Rather, each softwareapplication is typically written in a different, and incompatible,proprietary format.

Although many mass-marketed applications advertise that they are “open,”they are fundamentally proprietary systems and are “open” only to theextent that the vendor has decided to enable development of certaincompatible applications. These proprietary formats are generally notcompatible with other software applications. Even in those situations inwhich the software is marketed with the express representation that datais transferable between them (such as between Microsoft Word and CorelWordPerfect, or between various applications in a single manufacturer'ssuite of applications software such as Microsoft Office), frequently,they are not.

During the 1990's, law firm accounting systems, such as TMC and Elite,were sold based upon the representations that data was freelytransferred from these proprietary systems to more easily used,mass-marketed, software such as Excel spreadsheets. In practice,however, this was not the case. Transferring data was cumbersome, timeconsuming, and required manual intervention and conversion, typically,with specialized assistance from personnel specifically trained in theproprietary software.

Such incompatibilities regularly cause catastrophic failures. The “bluescreen of death,” received when a general protection fault occurs in theWindows operating system, has become a regular feature of network andPC-based computing. THE ECONOMIST at 23, Col. 3, II. 10-12 (Nov. 13,1999). Nor has the advent of Windows XP and other operating systemsresolved these problems. One of the advertised benefits of Windows XPwas that it finally enables software applications to transfer databetween one another. This marketing simply underscores the failure ofprior known approaches to resolve this fundamental and long-felt need.Moreover, Windows XP continues to suffer faults with a “Task List”interface provided to terminate the offending application(s). Thus,rather than correcting or avoiding the incompatibilities that give riseto such failures, the generally accepted solution remains to terminateapplication(s) and/or reboot the computer.

These types of failures are unacceptable in a modern businessenvironment. Instead, simplicity, transferability, speed, reliability,and security are required. Mass-marketed application software companieshave not met these challenges. Instead they continue to supply’ softwareproducts that include known—and remediable—defects. In 2001, MicrosoftCorporation ran a “99999” national advertising campaign—alluding to SixSigma (3.4 defects in a million opportunities) reliability for itsserver products. Similarly, during 2002, Oracle ran an “UnbreakableLinux” campaign. In reality, mass marketed business application softwareof the type used in professional services practices has come nowherenear achieving these levels of reliability.

Incompatibility, flowing from the proprietary nature of various softwareplatforms, ultimately requires that data be converted or that the sameinformation be re-entered in multiple applications. This is wasteful andintroduces multiple opportunities for error in data entry, maintenance,and retrieval. Proprietary software applications also require extensiveinvestment in training, retraining, and support. Typically, the morepowerful the tool, the more rigorous the training requirements. In aprofessional service(s) practice, such as medicine or law, theindividuals who could most benefit from these tools are the individualswhose time is most highly valued and whom the organization can leastafford the extensive investment in training, retraining, and supporttime required to gain proficiency in multiple applications.

Ideally, the data used in a business should be exchanged on a commoditybasis, the data should be application-independent. Although distributedPC-based networks could have fostered that result, they have had theopposite result. PC-based network systems have fostered theproliferation of incompatible, proprietary applications software. Theseproprietary systems have resulted in: maintenance problems; unduecomplexity in systems architecture and design; excessive network systemssupport requirements; the need for duplicate copies of applicationssoftware; increased systems maintenance; increased cost; impaired accessto data; increased training time and expense; diversion of professionaltime to non-productive uses; and, ultimately, impairment of access tothe information needed to run the practice or business.

Edward Tenner has compared the development of computer technology to anarm's race: arms races “help mainly the armorers,” in this case thedevelopers and vendors of computer systems, rather than users. EdwardTenner, “High-Tech Tantalus” THE WILSON QUARTERLY, Summer 1990, at102-05. Training time must be balanced against the value of upgrades,which sap even more resources. Managers demand more and more data fromsophisticated financial and statistical software. The ease of generationand revision of documents begets more documents and more revisions. Dataexpands to fill ever cheaper storage technology. As a result, thepaperless office never arrived. The result has been informationoverload. /d. New technologies have enabled greater productivity, yet,have done little to guide that effort in a productive manner. Automationalone does not make an organization more efficient or productive.Recognizing and addressing these various revenge effects are key toimproving the efficiency and productivity of a business organization./d.

Lack of Maturity of the Software Industry

In spite of Tenner's admonitions, more than a dozen years ago, thesoftware industry has done little or nothing to address the fundamentalincompatibility and lack of reliability of their products. Rather, withthe proliferation of application software options, the problem hasworsened, markedly.

Nor do large-scale software integration projects offer a viablealternative. In 1994, W. Wayt Gibbs, published an article, entitled“Software's Chronic Crisis” SCIENTIFIC AMERICAN, September 1994, at 86,in which he commented: “[t]he average software development projectovershoots its schedule by half; larger projects generally do worse.

And some three quarters of all large systems are ‘operating failures’that either do not function as intended or are not used at all. Gibbsnotes, sarcastically, that the art of programming has taken 50 years ofcontinual refinement to reach this stage:” /d. at 86-87.

Gibbs chronicles a number of high profile software failures and attemptsto deduce some of their root causes. These include a pervasive lack ofquality and repeated systems failures suffered by various softwaresystems. Among the software engineering failures Gibbs chronicles are:the baggage handling system at Denver International Airport; the loss ofthe Clementine space probe; the State of California's attempt to mergeits driver and vehicle registration systems; the unsuccessful attempt toforce the expansion of American Airline's successful “Sabre” reservationsystem to integrate hotel and car reservation bookings; the FederalAviation Administration's replacement of it's air traffic controlsoftware with its failed “Advanced Automation System;” and otherspectacular failures.

The term “software engineering” was coined in 1968 at a NATO ScienceCommittee meeting, to describe: “the application of a systematic,disciplined, quantifiable approach to the development, operation, andmaintenance of software.” /d. at 87. Yet, more than thirty years later,most software continues to be “handcrafted from raw programminglanguages by artisans using techniques they neither measure nor are ableto repeat consistently.” /d. Software development is stuck in apre-industrial stage of development, comparable to the stage ofmanufacturing prior to Eli Whitney's innovation of interchangeable partsthat could be assembled by any skilled craftsman.

Software “engineering” remains largely aspirational. Programmers'“acceptance that everything they produce will have defects—must changein response.” /d. at 88.

Nor have distributed systems approaches proved successful in overcomingthe lack of maturity of the software industry. In addition to theproblems presented by order of magnitude growth every decade, unduecomplexity, lack of adequate documentation, and failure to integratesuccessive stages of evolution of a software product, the stressesimposed by “distributed systems” are substantial. “Software is bucklingas well under tectonic stresses imposed by the inexorably growing demandfor ‘distributed systems’; programs that run cooperatively on manynetworked computers. Businesses are pouring capital into distributedinformation systems they hope to wield as strategic weapons. Theinconsistency of software development can turn such projects intoRussian roulette.” /d.

In June of 1994, IBM's Consulting Group released a study of 24 leadingcompanies that had undertaken large distributed systems: 55% cost morethan expected; 68% overran their schedules; and 88% had to besubstantially redesigned. /d. at 89. “The survey did not report onecritical statistic: how reliably the completed programs ran. Oftensystems crash because they fail to expect the unexpected. Networksamplify this problem. ‘Distributed systems can consist of a great set ofinterconnected single points of failure, many of which you have notidentified beforehand . . . .’ The complexity and fragility of thesesystems pose a major challenge.”' /d.

Gibbs emphasizes the lack of discipline and professionalism in thesoftware industry. Although some researchers are addressing practical,repeatable solutions, most of the industry is not. The SoftwareEngineering Institute has developed a Capability Maturity Model (CMM)for rating software development organizations. Its survey of over 261organizations ranked over 75% at the lowest level—chaotic in theirability to create predictable software that meets their customer'sneeds. By late 1994, only two, Motorola's Indian programming team inBangalore, India, and Loral's on-board space shuttle team, received thehighest rating, for having good management practices for softwaredevelopment. /d. at 90.

“Mass-market software producers, because they have no single customer toplease, can take a belated and brute force approach to bug removal: theyrelease the faulty product as a ‘beta’ version and let hordes of usersdig up the glitches.” /d. Although Microsoft Corporation prides itselfthat its software is “beta-tested” by tens of thousands of users, thissystem is expensive, inefficient, and, ultimately, ineffective. Mostsoftware developers cannot and do not secure even this ineffective,level of exposure. The result is a continuing stream of defective andfaulty products. /d.

Software continues to be developed through an “evolutionary” approach,despite the persistent flaws of that process. “Clean room” approachesattempt to prevent the introduction of bugs, or build software systemsfrom established prototypes of graphic interface components. Theyattempt to meld formal notations, correctness proofs, and statisticalquality control with an ‘evolutionary approach to software development./d. at 91. This development approach attempts to grow systems, onefunction at a time, and certify the quality of each unit beforeintegrating it into the architecture. /d. Unfortunately, these advancesgenerally have not been adopted by producers of mass-market software,the type of software typically used in a business or professionalservice(s) setting.

In contrast to other engineering disciplines, such as ChemicalEngineering, Software Engineering has steadfastly resisted progresstoward professionalism. Mary M. Shaw, of Carnegie Mellon University, hasdescribed some of the common stages in the evolution of engineeringdisciplines: from craft and production to commercialization; and fromcommercialization and science to professional engineering. /d. at 92.The progression in software development from craft and production tocommercial scale production was achieved decades ago. Yet, thedevelopment of scientific methods, and the merger of those methods withcommercialization technologies into a professional engineering frameworkhas yet to occur. It continues to encounter substantial resistance amongthe companies, managers, and engineers who produce these softwareproducts. As a result, productivity in software development has laggedbehind that of most mature disciplines, including computer hardwareengineering. /d. at 93.

One glaring example of the lack of professionalism in softwaredevelopment is the presence of “Easter Eggs” in mass-marketed softwareprograms. For years, programmers have been hiding “surprises” incomputer code. “Messages from the Hall of Tortured Souls”, THEECONOMIST, Dec. 18, 1999, at 75. Most popular software, includingbusiness, word processing, spreadsheet, Internet browsers, and othershave undocumented “Easter eggs” hidden among their millions of lines ofcode: exploding Lara Croft (the lead character in the popular ‘TombRaider” computer games), a flight simulator in Microsoft Excel 97, ahidden pinball game in Windows Word 97, Mozilla in Netscape Navigator V4.05; Mozilla being crushed by the Microsoft “e” mark in MicrosoftInternet Explorer 5. /d.

The consumer is not offered the option to reject these deliberate andextraneous bits of software. One expert in computer security, RossAnderson, at Cambridge University in Britain, has stated: “Easter Eggsare a telling symptom of poor quality control at many software companies. . . . Purchasers are right to be concerned; the great majority ofcomputer-security failures result from the opportunistic exploitation ofvulnerabilities that are discovered by chance. The software vendorsshould be concerned too; programmers who are so badly supervised thatthey can hide games for their friends' amusement can also hidetime-bombs.” /d. at 76.

Another indicator of the lack of professionalism in the development ofmass-marketed software is the steadfast refusal of most softwarecompanies to stand behind the products they sell. Rather than provideconsumers, the types of warranties that are common in almost every otherindustry, software manufacturers continue to disclaim responsibility fortheir products, going so far—fifty years after their discipline waslaunched—as disclaiming that their products will function as intendedand are fit for the express purposes for which they were sold.

Unlike the computer hardware industry, the software industry has failedto embrace consensus performance standards. “[M]ature engineering fieldscodify proved solutions in handbooks so that even novices canconsistently handle routine designs, freeing more talented practitionersfor advanced projects. No such handbook yet exists for software, somistakes are repeated on project after project, year after year.” W.Wyat Gibbs, SCIENTIFIC AMERICAN, September 1994, at 93.

In sum, the software industry in general, and the mass-marketed softwaresegment of the industry in particular—the segment upon which mostbusiness and professional software users rely, has strongly resisted thetrend to professionalism. Although researchers are investigating severalpromising approaches, these approaches are not yet generally accepted.Significant technical and cultural barriers remain to the success ofthese approaches. /d. at 95.

Proprietary Applications

Professional services markets have generally eschewed massiveintegration of data in favor of distributed solutions. Prior knownapproaches have typically involved creating yet another proprietarysoftware application, that substitutes for the original applicationsoftware or is used in parallel with it.

Christopher, eta/., International Publication No. WO 952401 0 A 1, forComputer System for Managing Patient c:;a˜e (Sep. 8, 1995) (ApplicationNo. US9502598), discloses an integrated computer system for managingmedical care of patients. Christopher discloses a centralized,proprietary computer system that handles the various functions in amedical office in a single proprietary application. Christopher'scentralized application replaces—rather than works in concertwith—various specialized, distributed applications that would otherwiseperform each function. Christopher prompts entry of information by theuser about a patient's medical history, physical examination, insurancecoverage, and diagnosis. Christopher maintains a database that allowsthe physician to review and compare cost information for alternativetreatments associated with the patient's diagnosis at the time oftreatment.

Christopher expressly recognizes that “separate, incompatible softwarepackages are often used for scheduling, accounting, word processing andretriev[al] . . . . A number of expert systems have been developed inthe past to assist the physician in clinical diagnosis. Other softwaresystems are intended to assist the physician in selecting appropriatetests and treatment, and interpreting test results. However, theseexpert systems have not been integrated with the other aspects of themedical practice to enable the physician to monitor the outcome ofpatient treatment, in terms of either the cost or efficacy of medicaltreatment.” /d. at 2, II. 3-12. Christopher seeks to address the problemof coordinating the information that would otherwise be contained inmultiple, incompatible software programs and replacing them with amassively integrated, proprietary computer system for managing medicalcare of patients.

Christopher's approach requires that all of the information be recordedand maintained in Christopher's proprietary system. This requires entryand/or reentry of the information in response to screen prompts. Thereis no accommodation to integrate or accept data from the types ofdistributed applications that are otherwise used in a medical office, orto transfer information maintained in an office's legacy systems.

Microstrategy, Inc., of Vienna, Va., is the assignee of a series ofpatents for systems and methods for deriving information from a databasesystem and outputting that information is a useful form through apersonalized On-Line Analytical Processing (OLAP) system.

Yost, eta/., U.S. Pat. No. 6,154,766, for System and Method forAutomatic Transmission of Personalized OLAP Report Output (Nov. 28,2000) describes a system for automatically generating data output on ascheduled basis in an on-line analytical processing (OLAP) system andbroadcasting personalized reports to users based upon the data contentselected. Yost describes an object creation module, communicating with adata warehouse and server, to gather the desired data on a scheduledbasis and generate a personalized report to the user.

Yost, eta/., U.S. Pat. No. 6,173,310 81, for System and Method forAutomatic Transmission of On-Line Analytical Processing System ReportOutput (Jan. 98, 2001) describes the server system used in his systemfor automatically generating data output on a scheduled basis in anon-line analytical processing (OLAP) system and broadcastingpersonalized reports to users based upon the data content selected. Yostdescribes a server system comprising: service creating means; servicesubscription means; service processing means; and output forwardingmeans.

Yost, eta!., U.S. Pat. No. 6,260,050 81, for System and Method ofAdapting Automatic Output of Service Related Output of Service RelatedOLAP Reports to Disparate Output Devices (Jul. 10, 2001) describes asystem for automatically generating data output on a scheduled basis inan on-line analytical processing (OLAP) system and broadcastingpersonalized reports to users based upon the data content selected. Yostdescribes a server comprising: service processing means; servicesubscription means; each user output device being associated with adevice specific style that designates the format in which the userreceives service output; output determination means; output formattingmeans; and output forwarding means.

Yost, eta/., U.S. Pat. No. 6,269,393 B1 for System and Method forAutomatic Transmission of Personalized OLAP Report Output (Jul. 31,2001) describes a system for automatically generating data output on ascheduled basis in an on-line analytical processing (OLAP) system andbroadcasting personalized reports to users based upon the data contentselected. Yost describes a server comprising: service processing means;service subscription means; and output forwarding means.

Selvarajan, et al., U.S. Pat. No. 6,279,033 81, for System and Methodfor Asynchronous Control of Report Generation Using a Network Interface(Aug. 21, 2001) enabling a user to asynchronously generate reportrequests through a web browser. The Microstrategy system auto″′0aticallybroadcasts, on a predetermined schedule, personalized messages tosubscribers based upon criteria established by the subscribers. Other ofMicrostrategy's patents relate to adapting the system and method to anon-line environment.

None of the approaches disclosed in the above-referenced Microstrategypatents is directed to integrating data in a distributed applicationenvironment of a professional services practice, or enhancing orfacilitating communication between the types of distributed applicationsthat are typically used in a professional services practice.

Other approaches, however, have addressed the professional servicesmarket. For example, Whitmyer, U.S. Pat. No. 6,182,078 B 1 for Systemfor Delivering Professional Services Over the Internet (Jan. 30, 2001),and Whitmyer, U.S. Pat. No. 5,895,468 for System Automating Delivery ofProfessional Services (Apr. 20, 1999), are directed to a professionalservices setting and, in particular, a law practice.

Whitmyer, U.S. Pat. No. 5,895,468 for System Automating Delivery ofProfessional Services (Apr. 20, 1999) discloses a device forautomatically delivering professional services directly to a client.Whitmyer describes a device including: a computer, a database of clientreminders, and software for automatically querying the database ofclient reminders to select reminders. The software automatically selectsand generates a form based on the client reminder and sends it to theclient over the Internet.

Whitmyer, U.S. Pat. No. 6,049,801 for Web Site Providing ProfessionalServices (Apr. 11, 2000), provides a web site that permits direct cliententry of reminders into the central database of client reminders.Whitmyer's approach, however, enables corruption of the data in thedocket by enabling potentially incorrect or unauthorized information tobe added to the docketing database. Apart from integrating formsgeneration to facilitate automatic rendering of professional services,Whitmyer discloses, no system or method for integrating or transferringdata from the various applications software used in a professionalservices practice.

Whitmyer, U.S. Pat. No. 6, 182,078 81 for System for DeliveringProfessional Services Over the Internet (Jan. 30, 2001) discloses asystem comprising: a computer; a database of client reminders; andsoftware for automatically querying the database by values attributed todata fields to select reminders. The software automatically generates aform based on the retrieved reminder and transmits it to the client overthe Internet.

Whitmyer, Patent Application Publication US2002/0029215 A 1 for Web SiteAutomating Transfer of Intellectual Property (Published Mar. 7, 2002)discloses a system for automating the transfer of intellectual property.Whitmyer's system comprises: a central computer, a client computer, acommunications link between them, and the Internet. The system includesat least one database comprising information records accessible by thecentral computer. Each record contains an intellectual propertyidentification number. A database contains a plurality of intellectualproperty transfer documents accessible by the central computer. Softwareon the central computer receives a property transfer request, generatesthe necessary transfer documents, transmits the transfer documents,receives the executed transfer documents back, and transfers theexecuted transfer document to the appropriate Government recordationauthorities.

Draper, U.S. Pat. No. 6,449,620 81, Method and Apparatus for GeneratingInformation Pages Using Semi-Structured Data Stored in a StructuredManner (Sep. 10, 2002) describes the pre-processing of semi-structureddata to identify the data to be selectively retrieved by semi-structuredqueries. Draper's method comprises: providing a mapping between astructured schema and a semi-structured schema; receiving asemi-structured query; generating a structured query based upon thesemi-structured query; and applying the structured query to structureddata stored in accordance with the structured schema.

None of these proprietary applications, whether before or after thepresent invention, addresses the need to integrate and make more readilytransferable the data used on a distributed basis in a professionalservices practice.

Case Management Applications

American Insurance Group (AIG), has implemented a Lotus Notes-basedsystem for managing its outside counsel. In addition to maintainingbasic identifying and background information about a matter, the systemprovided a vehicle for conducting correspondence between in-house andoutside counsel about a particular matter. The source data is maintainedin the Notes database with a dedicated, limited access messaging formatfor exchanging communications, authorization, and instructions about acase between outside counsel and the in-house case manager at AIG.

More recently, numerous case management software applications have beenoffered. Hummingbird, Ltd., offered a product under the brand nameLawPack. Hummingbird acquired LawPack when it acquired PC Docs GroupInternational, Inc., in June 1999. PC Docs sold the LawPack product forthe in-house counsel market and its PC Docs document management productfor outside counsel firms. The LawPack product did not fit withinHummingbird's core business strategy and Hummingbird announced in late2001 that it was phasing out the LawPack product.

Other vendors who have offered case management applications include:eCounsel {Bridgeway Software Inc.); Legal Desktop (Corprasoft Inc.); Lawmanager (Elite Information Group, Inc.); TeamConnect (Mitratech, Inc.);ProLaw (ProLaw—West Group); and Practice Manager (Real Legal, Inc.).Some of these products are also offered in web-enabled versions. Thepresent inventor believes that each suffers at least some of the samedrawbacks mentioned above of being either a proprietary, centralizedapproach that fails to accommodate the distributed, networkedapplication environment in which most professional services practicesoperate, or requiring duplicitous entry of data into distributed,proprietary systems in which the data is not readily portable orsubstantially application-independent

Web-Based Approaches

The Internet, generally, and World Wide Web in particular, has fosteredthe development of a series of protocols that enhance thetransferability of data. New protocols, such as POP (post officeprotocol), HTML (Hypertext Markup Language), XML (eXtensible MarkupLanguage), WAP (Wireless Application Protocol), SOAP (Simple ObjectAccess Protocol), and others, allow a variety of devices and accessories(computers, hand held devices, and mobile phones) to “talk to” oneanother. Judge Jackson observed in his opinion in the Microsoftantitrust case, that the Internet “could oust the PC operating systemfrom its position as a proprietary platform for applications developmentand the main interface' between users and their computers.” “The Future:Tomorrow's Internet,” THE ECONOMIST, at 23 (Nov. 13, 1999).

HTML describes only the layout of a web page and does not describe itscontents. Other protocols, such as XML (eXtensible Markup Language),also describe information .content through the use of metatags. XMLallows previously incompatible computer programs to communicate with oneanother to the extent of the information coded through metatags. Otherapproaches, such as Java, may also prove useful in facilitating theready transfer of data. Although XML has won widespread support inrecent years from Internet standard bodies such as the World Wide WebConsortium, it too has drawbacks, namely: astonishing complexity {Id. at26) and the impracticality of metatagging the entire contents of a page.Standards are, nonetheless, emerging. Most of these are open standards.

Although XML is beginning to address the issue of transferability ofdata in the context of web search engines, it is a limited approach andhas not been applied among the various software applications within amachine to enhance the transferability of data within an application orbetween applications. These standards have not found their way back intothe PC or office network environment to help resolve the basic problemof transferring information between incompatible application softwareplatforms within the same computing device or network. Nor have theseapproaches yet been applied to distributed networks serving professionalservices markets.

No solution yet emerged with respect to the security issues facinginternal networks (authentication; authorization; confidentiality;integrity; and non-repudiation), let alone the Internet. /d. at 26.Encryption technologies have been suggested as a potential solution. /d.Yet, these too are saddled with the drawbacks of undue complexity andbeing proprietary and, therefore, less flexible and more rigid thatdesired. /d. Although PKI (Public Key Infrastructure) systems, employingdigital certificates are also gaining ground, particularly in bankingand telecommunications, they are similarly complex, rely on third partyinvolvement, and are not ‘well-adapted to use within an internal networkto commoditize data between applications.

Open Architecture Applications

The “open architecture” movement regained momentum with the explosivegrowth of the Internet. The Open Source Movement has long required thataccess to its products, as well as any enhancements produced by usingthose products, remain freely available to all users. Operating systems,such Linux, feature open architecture. Open Source systems, such asBind, Perl, Sendmail, and Apache have proven to be far more reliablethan many proprietary software applications and operating systems.Microsoft itself recognized, in two internal memos, that the Open Sourcecollective approach has been able to produce “higher-quality code thancommercial software”. Rivette and Kline, REMBRANDTS IN THE ATTIC,Harvard Business School Press (1999) at 190. This is due in large partto the substantial peer review each program has received. /d. at 189.

Although some software companies, such as IBM, Oracle, Netscape, Apple,Novel, Corel, and others, have opened portions of their software to OpenSource developers, others have not done so at all and many have retainedcertain portions of their code as proprietary. Open Source systems couldbe useful in addressing the problems of transferability of data withinan enterprise and/or to remote users and clients external to theenterprise's network. Its ability is limited, at present. This isprimarily due to restraints on access and the lack of generally acceptedstandards for data formatting.

Long-Felt and Unresolved Need

After the filing of the Provisional Application upon which thisapplication claims priority, PriceWaterhouseCoopers, Sears Roebuck andCo., and possibly others, have announced attempts to develop customizedcase management systems.

Prior to the present invention, none of the systems of which the presentinventor is aware facilitated the ready transfer of data between thevarious distributed applications used in a professional servicespractice. None provided data in a substantially application-independentor portable fashion. Moreover, none of the prior known approaches haveresolved the unmet need to facilitate the transfer of data betweenoutside professional service providers and their clients. Thus, thereremains a long-felt and unmet need for a simple, efficient, andeffective means for enabling data to be transferred between varioussoftware applications and computers in an internal and/or externalnetwork and, in particular, in the setting of a professional servicespractice.

OBJECTS OF THE INVENTION

It is, therefore, an object of a preferred embodiment of the presentinvention is to manage data used in a professional services practice ina substantially application-independent, or at least substantiallyportable, fashion.

An additional object of a preferred embodiment of the present inventionis to enhance the transferability and/or portability of data between oramong various distributed applications of the types that are used in aprofessional services practice.

Another object of a preferred embodiment of the present invention is toprovide a method for managing data used in a business and, inparticular, in a professional services practice.

Yet another object of a preferred embodiment of the present invention isto provide a system for facilitating the transfer of data among variousdistributed software applications used in a law practice.

A further object of a preferred embodiment of the present invention isto aggregate and/or integrate data used to manage professional servicesprojects.

Additional objects and advantages of the invention are set forth, inpart, in the description which follows and, in part, will be obviousfrom the description or may be learned by practice of the invention. Theobjects and advantages of the invention will be realized in detail bymeans of the instrumentalities and combinations particularly pointed outin the appended claims.

BRIEF SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION

As illustrated in the accompanying diagrams and described in theaccompanying claims, the invention is a method and system for improvingthe accessibility and transferability of various data and/or informationresources used in the management of a business and, in particular, aprofessional services practice. The present invention may be practicedin various embodiments, some of which are described in detail below. Thefollowing summary and detailed descriptions of various embodiments ofthe invention are illustrative and explanatory only, and should not beconstrued to limit the invention as claimed in the appended claims andtheir equivalents.

In a preferred embodiment, the present invention comprises: ClientMeans; Matter Means; Project Means; Event Means; Task Means; and ifdesired, Document Means, Budgeting Means, Project Management Means,Assessment Means; and various alternative enhancements. In certainembodiments, Client Means, Project Means, and/or Activity Means may beprovided. Alternatively, the present invention preferably comprises:Client; Matter; and Event Means. The invention may further compriserelated information, data; and/or analysis, such as: communications;documents; forms; budget and/or cost information; project management;risk management; and other applications or information. The system ofthe present invention may be adapted to cooperate with other shared orlinked data sources.

The present invention may be embodied in various forms, including,without limitation: data, software applications, network, dataprocessing system, method, and various alternative forms. In a preferredembodiment, the invention comprises data relating to a professionalservices project, in machine readable format other than a proprietaryformat. The data of the present invention may be in a format that isother than exclusively proprietary, other than proprietary, or otherthan substantially proprietary. Further, the data may be in a formatthat is: substantially portable; portable; substantiallyapplication-independent; or application-independent. The data may be:docketing; calendaring; word processing; document management;accounting; time and billing; or any other data of a type used in aprofessional services practice.

Alternatively, the invention may be embodied in a software application,for use in conjunction with a professional services project, the datacooperating with data storage means, the data being in machine readableformat, comprising data in substantially portable format.

In another alternative embodiment, the invention comprises: a dataprocessing system for managing data related to a professional servicesproject, comprising: computer for processing the data; a softwareapplication cooperating with said computer; and data storage meanscooperating with said computer for storing data; the data cooperatingwith said software application; the data in a substantially portableformat.

In a further embodiment, the invention comprises a project managementsystem for a professional services project, comprising: computer networkmeans; data processing means cooperating with said network; one or moredistributed application means, cooperating with said data processingmeans; data storage means, cooperating with said one or more distributedapplication means, for storing data; said data being substantiallyportable between said one or more distributed applications.Alternatively, the invention comprises: a computer network for managinga professional services practice, comprising: a computer network; dataprocessing means; one or more distributed application means; datacooperating with said one or more distributed application means; datastorage means for storing said data from said one or more distributedapplication means; and project management database means cooperatingwith said one or more distributed application means for facilitating thecommunication of said data from said one or more distributed applicationmeans.

In yet another embodiment, the invention comprises an improvement on acomputer network for managing a professional services practice,comprising a computer network, data processing means, one or moredistributed application means, data cooperating with said one or moredistributed application means, and data storage means for storing saiddata from said one or more distributed application means, theimprovement comprising: project management database means cooperatingwith said one or more distributed application means for facilitating thetransfer of said data from said one or more distributed applicationmeans. Alternatively, the improvement may comprise, in a computernetwork for managing a professional services practice, comprising acomputer network, data processing means, one or more distributedapplication means, data cooperating with said one or more distributedapplication means, and data storage means for storing said data fromsaid one or more distributed application means, the improvementcomprising: a case management data base; said case management databasecommunicating with said one or more application means; said casemanagement database means being adapted to receive data from said one ormore application means; said data being substantially portable data.

Alternatively, the invention may be embodied in a user interface for acomputer network used in a professional services practice, comprising:first substantially distributed application; second substantiallydistributed application; said first distributed application beingadapted to communicate with said second distributed application; datastorage means cooperating with one or more of said first or seconddistributed applications for storing data used in the professionalservices practice; a user interface capable of accessing said data; andsaid user interface adapted to cooperate with one or more of said firstor second distributed application means and said data storage means. Inanother embodiment, a user interface may further comprise: client means;matter means; and project means. In a further embodiment, the userinterface may comprise: an user interface for computer network for usein a professional services practice, comprising: one or more distributedapplications; case management database adapted to communicate with saidone or more distributed application means; data storage meanscooperating with case management database means; and the user interfacecooperating with one or more of said data storage means and said one ormore distributed application means.

In yet another embodiment, the present invention may be an applicationfor managing a professional services practice, comprising: one or moreproprietary application means; data storage means adapted to cooperatewith said one or more application means for storing data relating to theprofessional services practice; shareware application means; saidshareware means cooperating with one or more of said one or moreapplication means and said data storage means to render the dataportable.

In another alternative embodiment, the invention may comprise a dataprocessing system for managing data relating to a professional servicesproject and providing pertinent data to a user, comprising: networkmeans; one or more proprietary, distributed application means; servermeans for distributing said one or more proprietary, distributedapplication means to the user on said network; data storage means forstoring said data, said data storage means being adapted to cooperatewith one or more of said server and said one or more distributedapplication means; first data integration means, cooperating with one ormore of said server, said one or more distributed application means, andsaid data storage means, for transferring said data; storing said datain a format other than a substantially proprietary format; and providingsaid data to a user.

In yet another alternative embodiment, the invention is a method for usein a data processing network for a professional services practicecomprising one or more proprietary software applications, the methodcomprising: accessing a proprietary application; storing data used inconjunction with said proprietary application; case management means,being in a format other than the format of the proprietary application,securing from the proprietary application on an automated basis, withouthuman intervention, said stored data used in conjunction with saidproprietary application; the case management means storing the data in aformat other than the format of the proprietary application; accessingcase management means; accessing said data stored in said casemanagement means; making said data, in format other than the proprietaryformat, available to a user.

In additional alternative embodiments, the present invention may beembodied in a shareware application, or in further alternativeembodiments, in a quality control system and financial reporting systemfor a professional services practice.

It is to be understood that both the foregoing general description andthe following detailed description are exemplary and explanatory only,and are not restrictive of the invention as claimed. The accompanyingdrawings, which are incorporated herein by reference and constitute apart of the specification, and in which like numerals are used to referto like elements, illustrate certain embodiments of the invention, andtogether with the detailed description, serve to explain the principlesof the present invention.

BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

FIG. 1 is a flowchart depicting the interrelationship of variousinformation resources and applications that may be used in conjunctionwith the database of a preferred embodiment of the present invention.

FIG. 2 is a flowchart depicting the flow of data and information betweenseveral of the data sources and applications in an alternative preferredembodiment of the present invention.

FIG. 3 is a flowchart illustrating the flow of various types of datainto a single application in a legal practice, in a manner known priorto the present invention, illustrating the potential conflicts betweenmultiple data sources for address information being supplied to theapplication, in this example, a word processing application.

FIG. 4 is a necklace diagram, depicting the flow of data from variousdata sources to a database of a preferred embodiment of the presentinvention.

FIG. 5 is a flowchart illustrating the flow of data between variousproprietary applications of the type known prior to the presentinvention, in the setting of a legal practice.

FIGS. 6( a) and 6(b) are flowcharts illustrating the data structure ofan alternative preferred embodiment of the present invention, adaptedfor management of a legal practice.

FIG. 7 is a flowchart illustrating the data structure of an alternativepreferred embodiment of the present invention.

FIG. 8 is a flowchart further illustrating the data structure of analternative preferred embodiment of the present invention.

FIG. 9 is a flowchart depicting an alternative preferred embodiment ofthe present invention, employing SOL server means to transfer databetween the data sources and a database of a preferred embodiment of thepresent invention, showing the flow of data between various dataresources and applications used to manage a legal practice.

FIG. 10 is an outline depicting the hierarchy of data of a preferredembodiment of an information management system of the present inventionimplemented through a Lotus Notes database.

FIG. 11 is a flowchart depicting some of the steps encountered in thecourse of a professional services representation.

FIG. 12 is a flowchart depicting a data structure and method of analternative preferred embodiment of the present invention.

FIG. 13 is a flowchart depicting a data structure and method of analternative preferred embodiment of the present invention.

FIG. 14 is a flowchart depicting a process for securing a U.S. patent.

FIG. 15 is a flowchart depicting a process for securing federalregistration of a trademark in the United States.

FIG. 16 is a flowchart depicting the work flow process of arepresentative intellectual property infringement litigation matter.

DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF PREFERRED EMBODIMENTS

Reference will now be made in detail to alternative preferredembodiments of the method and system of the present invention, examplesof which are illustrated in the accompanying drawings. A preferredembodiment of the present invention . . . in the setting of a lawpractice, is shown in FIGS. 1 and 4 as 10. In a preferred embodiment,the present invention comprises a method and system for aggregatingand/or transferring data useful in the management of a professionalservices project or engagement. The present invention preferablyprovides a substantially portable or application-independent format fordata used in a professional services practice.

The method and system of the present invention is illustrated in thesetting of a law practice. It is intended, however, that the inventionhas wider applicability to other forms of professional services, such asmedical practices, accounting practices, consulting services, and otherprofessional services practices, as well as other business applications.The following detailed descriptions of various preferred embodiments,and examples of the invention, are illustrative and explanatory only andshould not be construed to limit the present invention as disclosed andclaimed.

Various programming and database development techniques are well-knownin the art. Applicant expressly intends that these, as well asprotocols, standards, and techniques yet to be developed, be consideredwithin the scope of the present invention. For example, Michael Blahadiscusses various techniques that would be known to persons of ordinaryskill in the art at the time of filing the priority document for thepresent application, in “A MANAGER'S GUIDE TO DATABASE TECHNOLOGY”(Prentice Hall2001), which is incorporated herein by reference, in itsentirety, as if fully set forth herein.

“Proprietary,” “Common,” “Portable,” and “Application-Independent”Formats

For purposes of the present application, Applicant distinguishes between“proprietary” formats on one hand, and “common,” “portable,” or“application-independent” formats on the other. In principle. databasesshould be application-independent. In practice, however, databases arebuilt for a specific application. Michael Blaha, “A MANAGER'S GUIDE TODATABASE MANAGEMENT” (Prentice Hall 2001) at 3. Professional servicespractices rely on a variety of proprietary applications. Many are legacysystems in proprietary formats. Consequently, the data used in a typicalprofessional services practice is substantially application-dependent.The data is not readily transferable or portable among applications.

As used in the present application, the terms “common,” “portable,” and“application-independent” are intended to convey a sense of the relativetransferability of the data, and not an absolute or particular degree oftransferability or application-independence. These terms are notintended to imply that the data is perfectly application-independent orcompletely fungible between software applications and/or operatingsystems, without error, modification, or adaptation. “Portable” formatspreferably include standard such as ODBC: protocols and/or standards,either that are in existence today or that will be developed in thefuture. Application-independent formats include, without limitation,relational databases; SQL databases; and XML and HTML standards andprotocols. Application-independent formats may also include variousother web-enabled applications and protocols; SOAP; WAP; Open Sourceapplications; Lotus Enterprise Integration; ZMerge; or otherapplications that are adapted to permit, facilitate, or enhance thetransferability of data between applications.

The term “proprietary,” in conjunction with data formats of the presentinvention, refers primarily to proprietary software applications, of thetypes that are typically used in a law or other professional servicespractice. These may include, by way of example and not limitation,legacy systems and various hierarchical databases. The use of the term“proprietary” includes but is not limited to data that is entirelyapplication-dependent or exclusive to a single application. Nor is itintended to convey an absolute sense of incompatibility or exclusivity.Rather, the term “proprietary” is intended to convey a relative degreeof difficulty of transfer of data. For example, the relative degree ofdifficulty of transferring data from and/or among the various docketingand/or accounting applications of the type that were known in the legalmarket prior to the present invention is considered “proprietary.”Docketing systems (such as CPI. Dennemeyer, Master Data, Pattsy, or IPPOin an intellectual property practice), and accounting systems (such asBroadway, TMC, and/or Elite), prior to the present invention, hadlimited ability to transfer data to other applications used in theenterprise, such as word processing systems (such as WordPerfect andWord), document assembly systems, spreadsheets (such as Quarter, Excel,and Lotus 123), project management systems, and other softwareapplications.

Although Microsoft and Corel each represented, prior to the presentinvention, that documents could be transferred readily between theirrespective word processing programs (Word and WordPerfect), errors andcritical failures occurred frequently. Legacy knowledge bases in a priorversion of a software platform are frequently lost upon conversion orupgrade, requiring costly and time-consuming efforts to convertindividual documents and/or data to the newer release format. Althoughit may be possible to transfer data between these various “proprietary”applications. substantial effort is required to convert or transfer thedata. These applications are not specifically designed to render thedata readily transferable between them.

The term “proprietary” may be understood in some other settings toconvey some claim of exclusive ownership, such as rights accorded bypatent. trademark, copyright, or trade secret protection. The term“proprietary” as used in this application, however, is not limited tothat sense of exclusive ownership rights but, rather, is used in thesense of the relative degree of application-dependence of the data.Formats that may enable a high degree of transferability andaccessibility (such as .pdf, .tif, .jpg, and a wide variety of otherdata formats and protocols that are known in the art or may later bedeveloped) may be “proprietary” in the sense that they are subject toclaims of exclusive rights but should be considered to be “portable” interms of data transfer and aggregation for purposes of the presentinvention. Similarly, proprietary applications may use relational or SQLdatabases, XML or HTML coding, and be considered application-independentin the sense of the present invention. Similarly, some “open source”software operating systems and/or applications may be public domaininformation in terms of ownership rights but may lack the requisitedegree of data transferability.

Applicant considers application-independent data formats to be apreferred embodiment of the present invention. Nonetheless, the presentinvention may be implemented with “application-independent” or“portable” data formats, “proprietary” data formats, or some combinationof them. Although the use of application-independent formats, such asrelational databases, SOL databases, XML and HTML are within the levelof ordinary skill in the art, these techniques have not been applied forpurposes of the present invention, particularly in a professionalservices setting. In view of the lack of consensus standards, theinvention is implemented in a Lotus Notes database in a presentpreferred embodiment. In certain preferred embodiments, a Lotus Notesdatabase (which is ODBC-compliant), and/or SQL database, queriesotherwise “proprietary” databases (such as a “proprietary” docketing,accounting, word processing, time and billing, etc., system). AnAppendix is provided of the Forms implemented in connection with oneembodiment of the invention in a Lotus Notes database format.

Standards and Protocols

Applicant expressly intends that the invention include variousimprovements in protocols and/or standards for data transfer that mayoccur or be developed after the present invention. The preferredimplementation of the present invention incorporates generally acceptedprotocols that are accepted throughout the market for professionalservices in which they are used. These to-be-developed protocols orstandards may include developments in open source software, datastandards, data transfer protocols, and/or web-enabling technologies, orother technologies. The present invention is expressly intended to coversuch improvements and developments that may enhance the transferability,portability, or application-independence of data and/or the ability toaggregate data between or integrate various distributed, proprietaryapplications.

System of the Invention

The system of a preferred embodiment of the present invention comprises:a digital computer 300; one or more databases 200; and means forproviding data 100 to a user in substantially application-independent or“common” data format 400. As shown in FIGS. 1, 2, 4, 5, and 9, network10 comprises multiple applications 500. Data 100 is stored in one ormore data storage means 200 of native applications and, ultimately,supplied to one or more applications 500. This can be accomplishedeither through an intermediary database means 400, a server system 300,and/or a combination of a database 400 and server 300, that secures thedesired data 100 from the respective databases 200 and supplies it todatabase 400 and then to applications 500, or directly to applications500.

A typical law firm maintains a computer network hosting multipledistributed software applications used in the practice. Theseapplications typically store the data 100 used by the-applications 200in proprietary or substantially application-dependent formats. FIGS. 1,2, 4, 9, 12, and 13, depict some of the various distributed softwareapplications used in a typical law office environment:

Accounting—Time entries are typically key entered by secretarial staffand/or timekeepers. Expenses are also typically key entered into thefirm's cost recovery systems (photocopies, faxes, postage, and variousancillary services) or may be captured by automated cost recoverycomponents. Other charges are posted to the firm's accounts payablesystem based on submission of documentation that has been authorized bythe appropriate supervisor. These accounting data are then compiled andused to track the cost of the project, compare cost versus budgetedamounts, and prepare invoices to clients. In a law firm setting, theseaccounting records are typically maintained in a proprietary format(such as those offered by Elite, TMC, Broadway, or another vendor).

Docketing—Docket entries are typically key entered by a docketing clerkor department, based upon physical documentation received about eventsrelating to a project Docketing may also be accomplished by scanningbar-coded or other documentation. Alternatively, data may be downloadedfrom the PTO, EPO, or other, Governmental website. Docketing istypically carried out in a proprietary system (such as, for example,CPI, Master Data, Dennemeyer, Pattsy, IPPO, and others for patent andtrademark application services). These applications have been highlyconstrained with respect to the formatting of the data. In general,docketing data is not readily transferable from docketing systems toother applications, among docketing systems from different vendors, orbetween non-sequential (and in some cases, even sequential} versions ofthe same vendor's docketing system. Typically, when a user' convertsfrom one vendor's system to another's, or even between sequentialversions of the same vendor's software, substantial conversion effortand expense is required.

Some vendors of docketing systems are now offering web-enabled versionsof their software. Even these web-enabled versions, however, are limitedwith respect to the formats in which they can transfer and/or reportpertinent information about a project Prior known web-enabled docketingsystems report only that data maintained in the docketing system and arenot adapted to cooperate with other sources of data in the manner of thepresent invention. Moreover, clients using multipl˜ outside counselswould be required to visit multiple firms' web sites to gather therequisite information about their projects.

Word Processing/Document Management—With respect to law firms inparticular, two word processing systems enjoyed widespread usage priorto the present invention: Microsoft Word; and Corel WordPerfect. In viewof the acquisition of WordPerfect by Microsoft from Corel, the releaseof Windows XP in the Fall of 2001, and the failure of WordPerfect tomaintain its word processing software for the legal market, MicrosoftWord has gained ascendancy, at least among law firms in privatepractice.

Microsoft Word, in particular, has substantial limitations with respectto data transferability. Although Microsoft has long advertised thetransferability of documents between WordPerfect and Word, MicrosoftWord generally fails effectively to convert WordPerfect documents inpractice. WordXP is not capable of reading many documents that weregenerated in either WordPerfect or prior versions of Word, requiring alabor-intensive manual process to convert the document to WordXP.

Addresses—As depicted in FIG. 3, address information is gathered andmaintained in various databases in a typical law office: docketingsystems; accounting records; the firm's document management system; andattorneys' and staff members' individual address books. Data may also bereceived in the form of email records and handheld databases, orrelationship management databases. These records may be maintained inaddress software sold by Rolodex, Notes, iEnterprises, or numerous othervendors. Certain of these data formats, however, are incompatible withother formats.

Document Assembly or “Forms” systems, maintained in a firm's wordprocessing or docketing system or as a separate application (suchIPDAS): typically use the same address information. With multiplesources of address information, however, it is often unclear whichrecords are up to date and which are not valid. Depending on the networkconfiguration, access to certain sources of the information may beslowed or impaired. Moreover, multiple sources for the same informationinvites errors in data entry, retrieval, and maintenance.

Knowledge Base—Firms generally employ a variety of resources to maintainknowledge bases of information. For example, specialized legal resourcematerials, treatises, case digests, statutes, regulations, forms, priorwork product precedents, and a wide variety of other materials typicallyare maintained in the firm's knowledge management and/or documentmanagement systems. Attorneys may subscribe to various web-enabledservices or reference forms and precedents over the web. Precedents mayalso be accessed as email attachments. In recent years, the market forsupport services has expanded substantially and now includes legalresearch services provided by third party vendors. These vendors mayalso supply data used by the firm, either through electroniccommunications such as email or in a web-enabled fashion.

It has become common practice to employ the firm's document managementsystem to index work product precedent, in lieu of a separate knowledgemanagement system. This approach, however, is heavily dependent on thequality of abstracting in the firm's document management system becausefull text searching through the entire document management system isoften not practicable. Many of these document and knowledge managementdatabases are maintained in a variety of inconsistent and/orincompatible formats, necessitating access to multiple softwareapplications.

Records—Firms also maintain records of communications, correspondence,legal and fact research, and official communications received inconjunction with a representation. These records may be maintained inhard copy, in electronic form, or more typically in some combination ofthe two.

Thus, prior to the present invention, the attorney would have to accessmultiple native applications, employing widely divergent formats, inorder to access the data necessary effectively to manage a client'sprojects.

In an alternative embodiment of the present invention, as shown in FIG.1, data 100 is transferred directly from the native applications 200 inwhich it is normally stored directly to a Notes database 400 insubstantially application-independent format. Alternatively, as shown inFIG. 9, SQL server 300 periodically queries native applications 200 andsecures data 100 from native applications 200 and transfers it to Notesdatabase 400 from which it can be read or transferred to applications500, or from which it can be transferred directly to the end userapplications 500, in either “common” or “proprietary” format, without anintermediate substantially application-independent database or datawarehouse.

Data means 100 comprises data used in the business or professionalservices practice. Data means 100 preferably further comprises data in asubstantially “portable” or application-independent format. Common dataformats may include open formats, any of various ODBC-compliant formats,relational databases, SQL databases, various web-enabled formats (suchas ip, tcp/ip, ftp, http, HTML, XML, and other web-enabled formats), andany other suitable common data format that is adapted to supporttransfer of the data. In a preferred embodiment, data means 100 aremaintained in a common data format, in which it can be transferred amongthe various native applications, as shown in FIG. 2. Data means 100preferably further comprises methods, processes, or systems, forsecuring the data, such as key entry, voice recognition, opticalscanning and/or imaging, data transfer, reading data from any medium, orany other suitable techniques.

In a preferred embodiment, data means 100 comprises: client means,matter means, and event means. In alternative preferred embodiments,data means 100 further comprises any one or more of the following:project means; task means; documentation means; budget means; expensemeans; project management means; project evaluation means; and otherdata. Illustrative Forms for each type of entry are provided in theaccompanying Appendix.

Client Means

Client means preferably comprise data about the client for whom theproject is being performed. Client data means typically are maintainedin a docketing and/or accounting system. The client is established as aclient of the firm, after conflicts have been cleared with respect tothe representation. The data may be key entered into the accountingsystem and preferably transferred to the docketing system and othersoftware applications in which the data is needed, such as wordprocessing and/or address books, or vice versa. Prior to the presentinvention, the data was typically key-entered separately into eachapplication (conflicts, accounting, docketing, word processing, time andbilling, etc.) in which it was needed.

In an alternative preferred embodiment of the present invention, Clientmeans further comprises one of more of the following: BibliographicInformation; and Service Provider Information. Bibliographic informationpreferably comprises one or more of the following: Client Name; ClientNumber; Primary and Supplemental Contact Name(s) and Address(es);Client's Line of Business; Client's Products/Services; and/or any otherpertinent information. In an alternative preferred embodiment, ServiceProvider Information further comprises Attorney Information. TheAttorney Information preferably comprises one or more of the following:Referral Information; Originating Attorney; Billing (or ClientRelationship) Attorney; Supervising Attorney; Working Attorney(s);Billing Arrangement Billing Rates: Alternative Fee arrangements (ifany); and any other client of the firm to whom the client is related.

Matter Means

Matter means comprises data about the matter for the client for whom theproject is being performed. Matter data means typically are establishedin the same fashion as client means. Address information is typicallylinked to a client and/or matter. Thus, while the project is proceeding,client means, and/or matter means are preferably available and clientdata means, address data means, and matter data means, are coordinatedbetween accounting, docketing, address, and other applications in whichthe data is needed.

Matter Means preferably further comprises one or more matters adapted tothe professional services being rendered by the professional servicesfirm to the client. For example, in the setting of an intellectualproperty law practice, matter means may comprise any one or more of thefollowing types of matters: Patent; Trademark; General Counseling andAdvice; Administrative Proceedings; Litigation; Licensing andAgreements; and matters for specific third parties.

Matter means tracked by the present invention preferably includes anyone or more of various data about the matter, including withoutlimitation: Matter Name; Matter Number(s); Description; Matter CreationData; Responsible Professional; Billing Contact(s) for that matter; anyrelated documentation (including images); Powers of Attorney; pertinentcontacts; and pertinent details about the matter. Client Name and ClientNumber information is preferably adapted to be transferred automaticallyto the Matter means, to avoid the necessity of key entry or manualtransfer of the data.

Project Means

Project Means may be used to identify multiple projects that are beingcarried out in conjunction with the same client and/or matter. ProjectMeans preferably differentiate between multiple projects under the samegeneral matter. Projects may be aggregated under Client Means, MatterMeans, or both. Alternatively, Project Means may be omitted (FIG. 6( a))and project level information maintained at the Client and/or Matterlevel.

For example, Project Means may be identified at the Client level (FIG.6( b)), enabling multiple matter numbers to be issued for the sameproject in the accounting and/or docketing systems. Alternatively,Projects could be identified at the Matter level (FIG. 7}, enablingmultiple projects to be identified for the same matter in the firm'saccounting and/or docketing system. Similarly, projects could beidentified at both the client and matter levels, if desired. Thisflexibility enables the user to more precisely track activity or tasksin conjunction with rendering the professional services.

Project Means tracked by the present invention preferably includevarious data about the project, including without limitation: Type ofproject; Identifying numbers or codes; Description of the project;Country and Foreign Associates; Addresses; Comments; any RelatedDocumentation; Affiliated Parties; Counsel, Courts, and AdministrativeTribunals; Case Numbers; Responsible Person or Person(s) related to theproject; Serial Numbers; any pertinent information related to anyapplications, registrations, or grants; Transfer information; PertinentDates; any other suitable information relating to the project. Inalternative preferred embodiments, Project means is further adapted tocooperate with Client means, Matter means, Event means, or said Taskmeans, or is subsumed within or merged with said Matter Means.

Event Means

Event Means preferably comprises data about significant events relatingto the professional services being rendered. Event Means may comprise:Official Communications from Government Agencies, Orders, Motions,Notices, and any other pertinent events. Event Means may be maintainedin any of the various native applications employed in the enterprise. Anevent may be recorded in the Docket, in physical records, or in anapplication specifically developed to support and record events.Alternatively, events may be recorded in any other suitable application.

Event means tracked by the present invention preferably include any oneor more of various data about any significant event in conjunction withthe project, including without limitation: Event Date; Date that theevent record was created; Identification of the event: Description;Assessment of its impact; Milestones achieved or implicated by theevent; Responsible professional; Routing information; and any otherpertinent information about the event. Event means may further compriseinformation relating to retirement of the event.

The Client Name, Client Number, Matter name and Matter numberinformation preferably is adapted to be supplied to the Event meansautomatically, without requiring additional key entry or transfer ofdata by the user.

Task Means

Task Means preferably comprises data about the task being performed.Task Means may track specific items of work that may be conducted inconjunction with rendering the professional services. Task Means trackedby the present invention may include any of various data about tasksrelating to the services, including without limitation: Identificationof the task; Description; Task Creation or Assignment Date; Due Date;any Milestones; Estimated time and resources to complete the task;Priority; to Whom the task has been assigned; Routing; and any otherpertinent information about the task.

Task Means preferably are dependent from Matter or Project Means, at thesame level of dependency as Event Means. Task Means preferably furthercomprises information relating to closure of the task.

The present invention preferably is adapted to enable Client Means,Matter Means, Project Means, and Event and Task Means to cooperate withone another and/or one or more external applications to facilitatetransfer of data. For example, the Client Name, Client Number, MatterName, and Matter Number information of the Client Means and Matter Meansof the present invention preferably are transferred and automaticallyposted to the Event and Task Means of the present invention. Further,data is preferably transferred from one or more applications external toor cooperating with the present invention.

In alternative preferred embodiments, the present invention may furthercomprise one or more of: Documentation Means; Forms Means; Budget Means;Expense Means; Project Management Means: Project Evaluation Means; andReport Means. Each may cooperate with one or more of: Client means,Matter means; Project means; Event means; or Task means.

Documentation Means

Documentation Means may be provided to enable access to documentsrelating to the Project through the common data format interface,without having to separately access the records in their nativeapplication or through a document management application. Documentationmeans preferably includes links to several of the availabledocumentation relating to a project, including without limitation:indices or summaries; document management system; document assemblysystem; links to the document(s), copies of the documentation in acommon or different data format; or any other information aboutdocumentation desired by the user.

In a preferred embodiment of the present invention, Document Meansfurther comprises an icon or link, in the Event Means or other field, tothe document in a portable or application-independent format (such as anODBC, relational databases; SQL, XML, HTML, .tif, .jpg, or .pdf file);over the Internet, an extranet, or intranet; a link to the document in adocument management system in its native format; or other suitable meansadapted to facilitate access to the document.

Forms Means

Forms Means may be provided to enable access to forms or work productprecedents relating to the Project through the common data formatinterface, without having to separately access the records in theirnative application or through a document management or document assemblyapplication. Forms Means preferably is adapted to certain milestones orEvent Means that typically involve the preparation of certain forms inresponse. Once the milestone or event has been _reached, the systempreferably accesses the appropriate form. This access may include linksto pertinent forms, including without limitation: indices or summaries;address information of the document in document management or documentassembly systems; automatic assembly of the completed form from dataavailable in the system of the present invention; links to the formdocument(s); copies of the forms in a common or compatible data format;or any other information about form(s) desired by the user.

Budget or Time and Billing Means

Budget Means may be provided to identify projected and actual budgetperformance for the project. Some of the tools that may be used inconjunction with the present invention preferably include, withoutlimitation: Tables; Schedules; Spreadsheets; Databases; Graphs; Indicia;Icons; and any other means adapted to provide budget information for aproject or matter. Budget Means of the present invention may take anyformat suitable for use in conjunction with the system for providinguseful budgeting information. Budgets could be tracked separately byexpenses and fees, as well as at various discrete stages of the project.

In the context of rendering legal services, various types of budgetingsoftware are generally used, including without limitation: TMC; Elite;Broadway, CMS Open; and various others. Some of these software systemsinclude budget modules or budget functionality that may be adapted foruse in conjunction with the present invention. These prior systems,however, have been hampered by their inability effectively to deliverbudgeting data to the user in a format in which it can readily be usedor manipulated, such as Excel spreadsheets. It may be necessary,therefore, to export the data from these financial accounting softwarepackages to other format(s) from which it can be used more effectivelyin management of the professional services practice. This export can beaccomplished by dumping the data to spreadsheets adapted to cooperatewith the system of the present invention through VLOOKUP Tables, SOLqueries, or any other suitable means.

Data may be exported in particular format{s) so that they can be read byor transferred to the system and method of the present invention.Alternatively, data may be exported directly to the system to thepresent invention or to an intermediate database. Suitable databasescould include: Crystal Reports; Excel; Notes; SOL; Windows—compatible;Cold Fusion; HTML; XML; relational databases; ASCII; ODBC-compatible; orany other format, that is adapted for use in conjunction with the systemand/or method of the present invention.

For example, using a TMC Accounting system, the invention may export:Default budgeting information from the TMC system; Monthly Fees; MonthlyExpenses; Accrued Fees (from inception, year to date, or other suitableperiod or by category), and/or Accrued Expenses (from inception, year todate, or other suitable period, or by category).

In the context of an intellectual property practice, for example,budgets could be established for any one or more of the following:Preliminary Patentability Assessment; Patent Application—Preparation andProsecution; Trademark Clearance; Trademark Application Preparation andProsecution; Copyright Application Preparation and Prosecution; Opinionof Counsel; Patent Infringement Litigation; Trademark InfringementLitigation; Copyright Infringement Litigation; Patent Cooperation Treatyfilings; Foreign Trademark Application filings; and any other projectsuitable for determination and tracking of a project budget.

Each of these categories of project types may be further defined basedon the complexity of the project. For example, in a preferred embodimentof the present invention budgets are prepared based upon a simple,intermediate, or complex level of effort for patent infringement claimsor patent preparation and prosecution. Similarly, varying levels ofbudgeting could be offered to the user based upon the complexity of atrademark infringement claim, or other projects.

Budget means tracked by the present invention preferably includesvariations of the budget and expenditure information about the project,including without limitation: estimated budget(s) for the project;breakdown by stages; fees and expenses; accrued costs; payablesinformation; accounts receivable information; graphical comparisons ofprojected budget and actual expenditures; and any other informationdesired about the financial performance of the project.

In alternative preferred embodiments of the present invention budgetmeans further comprises a graphical interface for indicating to the userthe budget for the project relative to the accrued fees and expenses todate. This can be accomplished through any suitable graphical interface,such as the silo format, employed in many video games for depictingresources relative to expenditures, or other suitable format.

Project Management Means

Project Management Means may be provided to enhance management of theprofessional services project. Links to tools such as Microsoft Projectand/or Project Gateway databases that provide project management toolsmay be adapted to cooperate with the aggregated data.

In alternative preferred embodiments, flowcharts may be provided of thesteps being performed in conjunction with the project. The flowchart maybe colored, illuminated or provided with any other suitable indicator ofthe progress of the project. In preferred embodiments of the presentinvention these milestones may be keyed to certain event means achievedduring the course of the project.

Project Evaluation Means

Project Evaluation Means may be provided to assess the project. Riskassessment tools, such as litigation risk management tools, decisiontree tool, and various other tools could be provided and/or adapted tothe aggregated data. For example, TreeAge or other suitable riskassessment software may be coordinated with the present invention tocooperate to provide project evaluation tools based upon the aggregateddata.

Reporting Means

Reporting means may also be provided to enable the project manager to“slice and dice” the aggregated data in various ways to create andprepare various assessments. In preferred embodiments of the presentinvention, it may be desired to summarize the data in Excel spreadsheetsor other suitable summary formats. In a preferred embodiment of thepresent invention, reporting systems, such as Crystal Reports can beadapted to provide the reporting function of the present invention.

Data Transfer Means or Data Warehouse

The present invention may be implemented in a separate softwareapplication, such as a database or data warehouse running in Lotus Notesor other suitable application, or through direct transfer of the data100 from the native applications 200 to the end use application 500, asneeded. If implemented through a separate project management database,it may be desired to transfer certain data from applications in which itis native, such as a docketing or accounting system, to the projectmanagement application 400.

In the example of a dedicated Lotus Notes application the followingmapping may be employed from a docketing system, such as CPI, to theLotus Notes application.

TABLE 1 Exemplary Data Mapping from CPI Docket to lotus Notes ProjectManagement Application DESCRIPTION CPI ENTRY TRAQCS ENTRY TO TRIGGERFLOW CHART DESCRIPTION Provisional Docket EVENT: Filed Provisional FileProvisional Application Application Application Application FilingReceipt Expect EVENT: Receipt Provisional Provisional Filing ReceiptIssued Provisional Provisional Filing Receipt Application Filing ReceiptNon-Provisional Docket EVENT: Filed Non-Provisional File Non-ProvisionalApplication Application Application Application Filing Receipt ExpectFiling EVENT: Received Filing Receipt Non-Provisional Filing ReceiptNon-Provisional Receipt Non-Provisional Issued Missing Parts US MISSINGEVENT: Received Notice of Notice of Missing Parts PARTS-F Missing PartsResponse to Filed EVENT: Filed Response to Respond to Notice MissingParts Response to Notice of Missing Parts Missing Parts Restriction US-EVENT: Received Restriction Restriction RESTRICTION Requirement ElectClaims Filed EVENT: Filed Response to Elect Claims Response toRestriction Requirement Restriction Requirement Office Action US-3 MonthEVENT: Received Office Action Office Action OA Response to Filed EVENT:Filed Response to Respond to Office Action Office Action Response toOffice Action Office Action Final Office US-FINAL OA EVENT: ReceivedFinal Office Final Office Action Action Action Response to Filed EVENT:Filed Response to Final Respond to Final Office Action Final OfficeResponse to Office Action Action Final Office Action Advisory ActionReceived EVENT: Received Advisory Advisory Action Advisory Action ActionNotice of US- EVENT: Received Notice of Claims Allowed AllowanceALLOWANCE Allowance Issue Fee Paid Issue Fee EVENT: Paid Issue Fee PayIssue Fees Deed of Letters EXPECT EVENT: Received Deed of Patent IssuesPatent PATENT Letters Patent Maintenance Tax 3.5 EVENT: Paid MaintenanceFee Maintain Patent 4 yr. Fees 4^(th) year Tax 7.5 EVENT: PaidMaintenance Fee Maintain Patent 8 yr. 8^(th) year Tax 11.5 EVENT: PaidMaintenance Fee Maintain Patent 12 yr. 12^(th) year Appeal US-APPEALEVENT: Filed Appeal Appeal BRIEF Abandonment US-REVIVE EVENT: ReceivedNotice of Abandon Abandonment Continuation EXPECT PTO EVENT: FiledContinuation Continue Application LTR Application

The data may be drawn from the docketing application as it is enteredand published to the Notes application, as a result of periodic SOLserver queries, and transferred to the project management application,or through any other suitable means.

Notes Project Management Database System

The system and method of the present invention are preferablyimplemented through a personal computer-based system, operating in anetwork environment, using local and wide area network server technologyof the type well known in the art. In a preferred embodiment, the systemof the present invention is preferably implemented on Novell network,with database 400 running on a Lotus Notes server, cooperating with anSQL server 300 in communication with various servers, routers andnetwork components on which the software applications are maintained, tofacilitate access to various documentation, docketing, accounting,budgeting, and billing information as desired.

The present invention may be implemented through various alternativesoftware and/or hardware systems, including, without limitation: datastandardization; Lotus Agenda; Lotus Notes; Lotus Notes in conjunctionwith an SOL Server; Java; and various Web-enabled protocols. Thus, it isintended that the invention is not limited to any particular hardware orsoftware application(s) or implementation.

In an alternative preferred embodiment, as shown in FIG. 5, data means100 is maintained in various data storage means 200 and applicationmeans 500: docketing data in a proprietary format such as CPI;accounting data in a proprietary format such as TMC; records in physical(paper) copies, email (ftp, ip, html, xml or other web enabled formats),and/or electronic image files (.tif, .pdf, .jpg, and other formats), andrelated indices (document management systems such as DocsOpen); AddressBooks in a relationship management system (such as Notes Address Books,Rolodex, iEnterprise or other relationship management software); WordProcessing and Work Product in word processing applications (Word and/orWordPerfect) and related indexing systems (such as OocsOpen orSoftSolutions); presentation tools (such as PowerPoint and CorelPresentations); and evaluation tools (such as Excel, Corel Ouatro Pro,TreeAge decision tree software and other risk evaluation tools). Some ofthese formats are common (relational databases, SOL databases, HTML, andXML), while others are proprietary (CPI, TMC, Microsoft Word, MicrosoftExcel).

To the extent the native application formats, although proprietary, arecompliant with a common data standard, such as ODBC, the data may betransferred to a database or the project management application of thepresent invention. Alternatively, when the native application format(s)are incompatible, the data may be retrieved through queries of the typewell known in the art (such as SOL queries), converted, and exported toanother database in which it can aggregated or integrated with otherdata. Alternatively, the data may be exported then converted once indatabase 400.

These conversions and transfers are carried out in a manner well-knownin the art. For example, as shown in FIG. 9, the data may be exportedfrom the various native applications to a SQL data base, the SQLdatabase can be queried, and the data transferred to the projectmanagement application database 400. Persons of ordinary skill in theart would readily appreciate the various alternative means forimplementing the invention as described in this application.

Data storage means 200 preferably comprises data storage systems of thetype well-known in the art. This comprises any one or more of: harddrives; network drives; floppy or zip drives; tape or disc drives; anyother suitable optical, magnetic, or other memory; or various types ofdata storage devices. Alternatively, by employing common data formats orproprietary formats that are adapted to transfer information to commonformats, it may be possible to eliminate the use of physical storagedevices and access the information directly from its source, as needed.The invention, therefore, preferably further comprises data transfermeans 300 for transferring the data from its source to theapplication(s) in which it is used.

Thus, data storage means 200 and/or data transfer means 300 are intendedto comprise the various hardware, software, and operational techniquesthat enable transfer of and access to the data, as needed, whether in“real time,” near real time, or on a predetermined schedule, as the datais needed, or through the use of any of the various storage means thatare well known in the art. For example, data transfer means 300 maycomprise a SQL server, adapted to receive data from one or more nativeapplications and delivering the data to a Notes database.

Database means 400 is preferably a practice management database, adaptedto display the aggregated information. In a preferred embodiment of thepresent invention database 400 may be a Notes database adapted toreceive data means from various data storage means 200 or data transfermeans 300. Data preferably is received in database 400 in common and/orproprietary formats, and made accessible to the user through databaseand one or more application means. The data may be converted from itsnative format into a common format, retained in one or more of thenative formats, converted to one or more proprietary and/or commonformats.

As depicted in FIGS. 6( a), 6(b), 7, and 8, for various preferredembodiments of the present invention, the hierarchy of database 400, maybe: (1) Client Means; (2) Matter Means; and (3) Event Means (FIG. 6(a)). In an alternative preferred embodiment, the hierarchy may be: (1)Client Means; (2} Matter Mans; and (3) Event Means and Task Means.Alternatively, the hierarchy may be (1) Client Means; (2) Matter Means;(3) Project Means; and (4) Event and Task Means (FIG. 6( b)). In furtherpreferred alternative embodiments, the hierarchy may be: {1) ClientMeans; (2) Project Means; (3) Matter Means; and (4) Event and TaskMeans.

Application means 500 comprise any of the various applications that aretypically used in a business and, in particular, in a professionalservices practice. These may include, in the example of a law practice:word processing; document assembly; document management; time keeping;accounting; cost recovery; budgeting; billing; document retrieval; workproduct precedents; forms; evaluation tools; spreadsheets; docketingsystems; legal research systems; statutory, regulatory, and case lawprecedents; legislative and/or regulatory tracking systems; specializedknowledge systems for various types of practices; and various otherapplications.

It will be apparent to persons of ordinary skill in the art that variousmodifications and variations may be made in connection with the systemof the present invention, without departing from the scope of theinvention as claimed. For example, the invention may be implemented withany suitable data storage and/or transfer means. The order of the steps,and in particular storage and transfer of the data are not critical.Data may be stored in the native application and accessed as needed.Alternatively, data may be stored in a portable orapplication-independent format. Further, data could be accessed by theapplication either as needed or on the basis of periodic updates andstored in the application being used to display the data. Thus, theorder of the steps and the specific location where any one or more ofthe data means are stored are not critical. The data desired need onlybe available when needed.

As a further example, the data formats used for the common data formats,proprietary data formats, and any combination of the two are notcritical. Although common data formats are preferred, the invention maybe implemented through proprietary formats and conversion of the data asnecessary. Similarly, the data may simply be converted from its nativeformat to any intermediate format or a final format Thus, it is intendedthat the present invention comprise the various modifications andvariations of the invention that would be known to persons of ordinaryskill, provided they come within the scope of the appended claims andtheir equivalents.

Method of the Invention

The method of the present invention preferably comprises various knowntechniques for aggregating data that have not traditionally been used ina professional services practice, and applies them in a professionalservices setting. Data identifying the client, matter and/or project,preferably are aggregated with budget data (accounting), and/orinformation or documentation about events, and/or information aboutdeadlines (docketing), to support management of the professionalservices project. The project management application of the presentinvention preferably provides reporting about the status and progress ofthe project to the professional, as well as to the client through avirtual private network web interface to the application.

FIGS. 1, 4, 5, 12, and 13, depict various aspects and preferredembodiments of the practice management application of the presentinvention. FIG. 1 is a conceptual diagram depicting the function of themethod of the present invention to store 200 and act as a warehouse 400for data 100 that is useful in the management of the practice. FIG. 1further depicts the transfer of the data back out to variousapplications 500. FIG. 4 is a necklace diagram depicting the input andtransfer of data means 100 from various applications 500 used in thepractice to the database 400 of the present invention.

FIG. 2 depicts the flow of information between various databases,applications, and functional areas of a law practice. FIGS. 1 and 2depict various database systems that are typically used in aprofessional services practice: accounting; docketing; recordsmanagement; word processing; document management; document assembly;knowledge database of work product precedents, and forms; variousaddress lists for clients, vendors, business development, and othercontacts (client relationship management); as well as other data. Priorto the present invention, these databases generally were not adapted tocooperate with one another. In fact, the ability of the users totransfer data between applications was frequently severely constrained.

As shown in FIG. 2, once entered in either the accounting or docketingmeans, address information may be transferred to address means.Alternatively, even if entered in multiple locations, address data maybe cross-checked and/or verified against information in accountingmeans, docket means, third party data sources such as web sites ofaddresses, electronic yellow pages, or other data sources, to reduce oreliminate errors in key entry. Address means may be maintained in onelocation and transferred to other applications in which it is neededthrough database 400 or to other software applications used in thepractice. The order and timing of entry of the transfer and aggregationof the address means between the accounting, docketing, and addressmeans is not critical. Thus, the present invention preferably resolvesmany of the prior known constraints on the transferability andaggregation of data.

FIG. 2 depicts a series of potential transfers 300 of data 100 betweenvarious data means 100, data storage means 200, and application means500, through database 400. As depicted in FIG. 2, using common dataformats, data may be transferred 300 in real time or near real time,without the need for intermediate databases 200 or 400. Alternatively,whether in proprietary or common data formats, data 100 may betransferred 300 from data storage means 200 to applications 500 wherethe information is needed to manage the practice. Database 400, as shownin FIGS. 1, 4, 9, and 12, may aggregate the data and provide a centralrepository for needed information.

Data may be converted to facilitate the direct transfers as depicted inFIGS. 2 and 5. Alternatively, as shown in FIGS. 1 and 4, one or one ormore intermediate databases may be employed to transfer the data fromone or more native proprietary formats, to a portable orapplication-independent format in which the data may be aggregated andemployed effectively in managing the project.

As shown in FIG. 2, docketing information may be transferred to a wordprocessing, document management system, status reporting, addressstorage, accounting systems. Accounting information may be exchangedwith docketing and may be used to establish client entries in docketing,after a new client or matter has cleared conflicts and been opened .inthe firm's accounting system. Time keeping records are entered, andtransferred to accounting, from where they are used in the billingprocess. Similarly address information is frequently needed in wordprocessing applications, docketing, and accounting. As shown in FIG. 2,address data may be readily transferred between all three applications.

The firm's knowledge base may comprise forms and/or prior work producthoused in its document management system, a separate database of priorwork product, a forms directory or database, third party sources offorms and/or precedents, document assembly systems, various web-basedsources of precedents, or email attachments providing forms orprecedents for use by the professional in completing the project. Wordprocessing documents may be transferred to various features of thefirm's knowledge base and records systems, including prior work productdata base, forms, and records. Similarly, prior work product may beretrieved by the firm's document retrieval system for use in generatingnew work product through the work product generation process.

In alternative preferred embodiments, as depicted in FIG. 5, data means100 are preferably transferred 300 to corresponding data storage means200 from where they are transferred to applications means 500. This canbe accomplished in any of several ways: standardizing the data means ona common format among the various data storage means and applicationmeans; using the same proprietary format among the data means to thedegree necessary to achieve transferability of the data means to thedata storage means and application means involved; or converting eachdata means from its native proprietary format in the respective datastorage means or application means in which it is native to either acommon format or the native format of the recipient data storage meansof application means. As shown in FIG. 5, the docketing, accounting, andaddress data means are coordinated in the management of the project.

In alternative preferred embodiments, data may be adapted to betransferred automatically or on a predetermined schedule. For example,certain events may be considered milestones for the advancement of aproject These milestones may be identified and, when they are reached inthe docketing system, a message transferring the appropriate data sentto a project management or other database. As an example, certaindocketing events may be designated as milestones. These milestones maybe correlated to certain events, and when they are reached, a message issent to a Notes database identifying that the milestone has been reachedand making an appropriate event entry and designating the progress ofthe project through an indication on a flowchart of the project, withlinks to any applicable documentation. Docketed entries may be mapped asstandard milestone events, which trigger automatic entries andindicators in the event and project management means.

Method and System for Quality Control of Professional Services

Professional services are inherently personal in nature, posingsubstantial challenges in ensuring control over the quality ofprofessional services, particularly in a large corporate or law firmsetting. By modeling, tracking, and monitoring of the delivery ofprofessional services, the present invention provides a means forenhancing the quality control of professional services.

Various quality control systems have been introduced in a number ofbusiness settings. One system of quality control that has receivedsubstantial recent press attention is the so-called “Six ‘Sigma” system,pioneered by Motorola. Harry J. Mikel and Richard Schroeder, S1x SIGMA:The Breakthrough Management Strategy Revolutionizing the Worlds'Corporations (1sT ed. 2000), which is incorporated herein by reference,as if fully set forth herein. Six Sigma systems have been successfullyimplemented by Motorola, Allied Signal, General Electric, and others,often with substantial positive results.

Although Six Sigma systems have enjoyed substantial success inmanufacturing operations, quality control over service functions andprofessional services (such as legal) in particular have been moreproblematic. Some companies, such as DuPont, have implemented Six Sigmaquality control systems in their legal department. Few if any technicaltools are available to law departments to implement the rigorousmeasurement protocols necessary for effective quality control. Certainembodiments of the present invention may provide the necessary tools forassessing, monitoring, and measuring performance relative to these typesof quality control procedures.

Any quality control program, whether a Six Sigma or other program,requires detailed modeling, monitoring, and measurement of performance.Specifically, a Six Sigma program seeks to identify the number of“defects” per requirement for a functional area. The requirement issampled continuously (or continually) and the number of defects ismeasured. One “sigma,” (standard deviation) is about 317,400 defects permillion; four sigma about 6,200 defects per million; and six sigma,about 3.4 defects per million). The actual sigma value that is desireddepends on a number of factors and the cost-effectiveness of achievingthat degree of reduction in defects relative to the cost of the defects.

The client's expectations or requirements for a particular professionalservice can be determined and delivery of the service monitored todetermine the number of times the service is actually delivered withinthat parameter or outside of it (a failure). The service can then bemodeled and the root causes of the failure are then assessed todetermine ways in which the process of delivery of the service can bereengineered and improved in a. cost effective manner. /d.

These steps require not only definition of the workflow but monitoringand measurement of the delivery of the service, functions can be readilyaccomplished in conjunction with the present invention. In order toidentify process improvements, the process itself must be defined anddocumented. These are accomplished in the project management functionsof the present invention.

For example, in the context of a patent application, the processworkflow may be defined and documented in conjunction with providing theuser an indication of the stage of the process that has been attained.FIG. 14 depicts an example of a sample flowchart for the process ofsecuring a U.S. patent; FIG. 15, a process for securing U.S. trademarkregistration; and FIG. 16 a process of a typical intellectual propertyinfringement litigation matter. Requirements may be established for anystage(s) of the process that are significant to the client. As a furtherexample, the service provider could define specific time period forreporting events, submitting drafts for review, returning edited drafts,etc. Similarly, requirements could be based on further substantiveparameters of the work product, such as compliance with certainguidelines or more subjective criteria relating to the content of thework product. These requirements may then be stored in one or more ofthe applications or in a project management application, such as thatdescribed above.

In the example of implementing the present invention through a separateproject management application, the project management applicationsoftware could then compare the actual event timing that is reported tothe project management application or entered directly in the projectmanagement application with the requirement that has been determined andstored in the project management application (for example sending to theclient Official Communications received in conjunction with the matterwithin 2 business days of receipt, returning calls within 24 hours,etc.). Thus, the level of “defects,” and the efficacy of any processchanges that are made to reduce the number of defects, can be monitoredeasily and with minimal or no manual intervention.

It will be apparent to persons of ordinary skill in the art thatvariations and modification may be made to the present invention. Forexample, the order of steps in the process of the present invention, theparticular hardware and software implementation are not critical. Thepresent invention is also preferably adapted to track and manage qualitycontrol systems for the management of business processes other than aprofessional services practice. Thus, it is intended that the variationsand modifications of the invention and its components are consideredpart of the invention, without departing from the scope or spirit of theinvention as disclosed and claimed, provided they come within the scopeof the appended claims and their equivalents.

1. A user interface for a computer network used in a professionalservices practice, comprising: a. first substantially distributedapplication; b. second substantially distributed application; c. saidfirst distributed application being adapted to communicate said seconddistributed application; d. data storage means cooperating with one ormore of said first or second distributed applications for storing dataused in the professional services practice; e. a user interface capableof accessing said data; and f. said user interface adapted to cooperatewith one or more of said first or second distributed application meansand said data storage means.
 2. The user interface of claim 1, said userinterface further comprising: a. client means; b. matter means; and c.project means.
 3. The interface of claim 2, said project means furthercomprising: event means and task means.
 4. The user interface of claim1, said user interface further comprising one of the group consistingof: links to records in said one or more distributed applications;project management means; risk assessment means; docketing means; andaccounting means.
 5. The user interface of claim 1, further comprisingdata in substantially portable format.
 6. The user interface of claim 1,further comprising data in portable format.
 7. The user interface ofclaim 1, further comprising data in substantiallyapplication-independent format.
 8. The user interface of claim 1,further comprising data in application independent format
 9. The userinterface of claim 3, further comprising docketing means.
 10. The userinterface of claim 3, further comprising accounting means.
 11. A userinterface for computer network for use in a professional servicespractice, comprising: a. one or more distributed applications; b. casemanagement database adapted to communicate with said one or moredistributed application means; c. data storage means cooperating withcase management database means; and e. the user interface cooperatingwith one or more of said data storage means and said one or moredistributed application means.
 12. The user interface of claim 11, saiduser interface further comprising; a. client means; b. matter means; andc. project means.
 13. The user interface of claim 12, said project meansfurther comprising: event means and task means.
 14. The user interfaceof claim 11, said user interface further comprising one or more of thegroup consisting of: links to records in said one or more distributedapplications project management means; risk assessment means; docketingmeans; and accounting means.
 15. The user interface of claim 11, furthercomprising data in substantially portable format.
 16. The user interfaceof claim 11, further comprising data in portable format.
 17. The userinterface of claim 11, further comprising data in substantiallyapplication-independent format.
 18. The user interface of claim 11,further comprising data application independent format.
 19. The userinterface of claim 13, further comprising docketing means.
 20. The userinterface of claim 13, further comprising accounting means.